Nostr Web Client

Filtering doesn't prevent valid tx's from landing on chain

JackTheMimic 8mo ago 💬 2

I didn't say it did... Read again.

average_bitcoiner 8mo ago 💬 2

So why kvetching about configuration? It's a moot point.

You can configure whatever you want and it won't stop the spam

JackTheMimic 8mo ago

Not the point.

It is not. Configuration is HOW you know what consensus is.

Example:

If I give you the Option to choose between the colors red, white, and blue.

Then 20% choose white

10% choose blue

70% choose red

The overwhelming consensus is that red is the prominent color. But that doesn't mean you'll NEVER see blue or white.

But if I say:

"Here is your option, the color red."

You will never see blue or white no matter what people prefer.

Removing configuration is removing choice.

Configuration is not consensus. I can config whatever I want and consensus valid txs will still be in my bloclchain data and UTXO set

JackTheMimic 8mo ago 💬 2

You are misunderstanding consensus in this context. Consensus is not something that will "still be in my blockchain data and utxo set" the nodes dictate valid. Miners offer candidates based on the CONSENSUS of the nodes they pull the previous transaction blocks from. Which is determined by the CONFIGURED ruleset.

average_bitcoiner 8mo ago 💬 5

I speak of technical context, the only one that matters for creating a timechain entry.

Also, miners get tx'snout of band all the time, you cannot prevent that and long term incentives will only increase private mempool usage. MARA's slipstream offers whatbstarted at TG DM's as a service with a UI.

If spammers pay the fee, spammers get in the block. This is economic reality. Policy or configuration changes won't change this incentive. It's called censorship resistance.

Ronin 8mo ago 💬 1

if every node policy is useless why do they exist?

Legacy script problems from what I can tell. Or

nostr:nprofile1qqs0m40g76hqmwqhhc9hrk3qfxxpsp5k3k9xgk24nsjf7v305u6xffcpzamhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuurjd9kkzmpwdejhgtcwc656e might know.

Otherwise we deduce it from code and comments.

https://antoinep.com/posts/relay_policy_drama/

"Standardness rules exist for three main reasons. The first is as DoS protection. Your peers on the P2P network are not identified and some transactions are more expensive than others to process. An asymmetry between the cost of sending you an unconfirmed transaction (which is very small) and the cost for you to process it creates a DoS vector. Another reason for standardness rules is to provide upgrade hooks for soft forks. Invalidating a type of transactions in a soft fork that was already non-standard for a while gives more guarantees that a non-upgraded miner won’t include a newly-invalid transaction in a block, making soft forks significantly safer to roll out. Finally, standardness rules have also been used as a way to nudge behaviour toward a less harmful approach, or to mildly deter certain activities. For instance by standardizing OP_RETURN outputs, or discouraging data storage back when blocks were not full."

Obviously you aren't reading what I write so, good luck with your spam. I will run the code I want to with filters.

And your UTXO set will continue to bloat as spammers fill the chain. Won't be me spamming but it will bloat nonetheless.

I won't be keeping them in nor broadcasting them from my mempool and I will not be validating blocks from miners outside of my policy set.

So you're forking off?

JackTheMimic 8mo ago

I haven't yet, I seem to be in consensus at this point. We'll see who gets forked. lol

Weatherall 8mo ago

he speaks in a "technical context" because thats the language his handlers have allotted him to strawman the issue.

#bitcoin is for bitcoin. which is money.

the rest is fucking noise and attack.

Boolean logic is a pretty simple language.

Valid is not standard. Policy is not consensus.

Guy, either you missed something I wrote or you are strawmanning my argument.

What is your end goal?

JackTheMimic 8mo ago 💬 2

Lol, to have the most freedom of choice for the code 90% of Bitcoiners run at the moment.

Is that goal okay with you?

Knots already exists. The choice is up to the user now. Fwiw, I have a knots node.

average_bitcoiner 8mo ago 💬 2

Need more education. Mainly so people can understand the difference between CheckTransaction() and IsStandardTx()

Yeah, Coke and Pepsi exist so no one should complain when they take away the flavor variety because you can just drink Pepsi.

I agree. Branding and education matters

JackTheMimic 8mo ago

The fact that you don't see the sardonicism in my reply is troubling.